The New India Assurance Company ... vs Sandeep Kumar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2229 Jhar

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
            [CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPELLATE JURISDICTION]
                      M.A. No. 330 of 2018
                                 ...........

The New India Assurance Company Limited, Ranchi .... Appellant Versus

1. Sandeep Kumar, Minor, Aged about 11 year, Son of Chandrika Yadav, Resident of Village- Moktama, P.O. & P.S. Chatra, District- Chatra represented through his father and legal Guardian, Chandrika Yadav, S/o Thakuri Yadav, Resident of Village- Moktama, P.O. & P.S. Chatra, Distt. Chatra

2. Rajendra Yadav, S/o Peman Yadav, R/o Village- Parsoni, P.O. & P.S. Itkhori, District-

     Chatra                                                     ..... Respondents
                               With
                         M.A. No. 336 of 2018
                                      ...........
     The New India Assurance Company Limited, Ranchi            ..... Appellant
                               Versus

1. Shama Parween, Aged 28 years, W/o Md. Muzabir, Resident of Village- Khap, P.O. Hafuwa, P.S. Chatra, District Chatra

2. Rajendra Yadav, S/o Peman Yadav, R/o Village- Parsoni, P.O. & P.S. Itkhori, District-

     Chatra                                                     ..... Respondents
                               ............
     Coram:       Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kailash Prasad Deo
                  (Through : Video Conferencing)
                               .....
     For the Appellant                : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate (in both cases)
      For the Respondent no.2         : Mr. Rahul Dev, Advocate (in M.A. No.336/2018)

04/Dated: 06/07/2021.

Mr. Rahul Dev, appearing on behalf of the owner of the offending vehicle namely, Rajendra Yadav, S/o Peman Yadav, R/o Village- Parsoni, P.O. & P.S. Itkhori, District- Chatra has submitted that both Miscellaneous Appeals i.e. M.A. No.330/2018 and M.A. No.336/2018 are arising out of the same accident, as such, he is appearing in both the appeals on behalf of the owner of the offending vehicle. He shall also file vakalatnama on behalf of the owner of the offending vehicle in M.A. No.330/2018.

Learned counsel for the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Mr. Manish Kumar has submitted that Insurance Company is basically confining its prayer with regard to right of recovery to the Insurance Company after satisfying the award to the claimants as awarded by the learned Tribunal. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company has further submitted that though the owner has appeared through his learned counsel before the learned Tribunal and the Insurance Company being O.P. No.2 has taken a categorically stand, which is mentioned at internal page no.4 of the impugned judgment that; "This Opposite Party No.2 is not liable to pay any

compensation or claim amount also for the reason that the owner is bound to get valid permit of the vehicle and the said policy covers only under a permit within the meaning of Section 66 of the MV Act, but the owner of the said vehicle knowingly and intentionally used the said offending vehicle beyond or without the route permit and committed breach of contract," as such, the liability of the award may be shifted upon the owner of the vehicle or at least right of recovery may be given in favour of the Insurance Company after the satisfying the award.

Mr. Rahul Dev, appearing on behalf of the owner has submitted that because of his some personal difficulties today, the matter may be listed on 14.07.2021.

Considering the same, put up these cases on 14.07.2021.

( Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) sandeep/R.S-